Good thing CT is not a ski destination. This precedent would kill whatever ski resort business might be. I sure hope UT, CO and the other ski states don\’t get any ideas.
Even in 1st year law school, the \”assumption of risk\” doctrine is taught to govern all activities with these inherent risks. Under the logic of this decision, any skier would have the \”right\” to negotiate away the assumption of risk statement that is usually printed right on the lift ticket. Count on fewer ski resorts in the future if such is the case.
Furthermore, I own horses and know that every time I walk into a stall with them, I have to be on my guard, no matter how experienced I am, or how well trained the horse is. Given that the horse isn\’t a piece of equipment that can be controlled under all circumstances, it is ludicrous for a judge to think that the defendants had a duty or even the ability to protect the plaintiff any further than they did. Horseback riding is inherently dangerous. I have watched helplessly as my own daughter (who is a very experienced rider) was dragged around the pasture by a \”good horse\”. Fortunately, she escaped major injury. What was the lesson? Who knows? We never figured out why the horse bolted. The only real lesson is the hard lesson of life – that stuff happens. It happens more often when you are involved in an activity that involves risk. My sympathies for the plaintiff, by she shouldn\’t expect anything from the defendant, unless the defendant actually caused the accident. I didn\’t see that. Judges need to pull their heads out and stop pandering for the sake of sympathy or political expediency (not wanting to make an unpopular decision, despite the law). Attorneys bent on unjust self-enrichment are working their way to a miserable destiny.
Well said Ski Dude. I am a very experienced rider, and know that you should always expect the unexpected, especially if your are on an unfamiliar horse. I feel for these businessowners on this matter. This decision could put a business such as this under the ground. This decision is for the birds!
Wait a minute – have any of you sent your kids off for activities? Without a waiver, no participation – and you think your ten year old should \”assume the risk\”?
These types of pre-loss waivers or attempted immunity from consequences of negligence are in many cases nothing but an excuse for poor management practices. They also frequent overreach and seek to exclude even the operator\’s own negligence.
The old saying is \”pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered\”. I never have liked these waivers, especially when dealing with minors, and frankly, I don\’t have a problem with this decision.
LJK & Sam are actually correct in their comments: \”societal expectation\” is what is controlling here. Who signed the waiver? The parent or the minor? What about assumption of risk? I guess they could have \”trained\” her on the plastic horse with the wheels over in the corner, but she probably would have been insulted & sued them for that!
Ski Dude is absolutely right. This decision will kill several segments of the recreational industry. Horses are unpredictable, even for experienced people. Not to mention the message that SOMEONE ELSE is responsible for whatever bad happened.
I have been on the other side of exactly this type of suit – I had a horse kick another rider after telling the rider to leave one horse length between each. To no avail – Horses are live animals-they are unpredictable-I\’ve seen the gentlest old broodmare go running and bucking off because of a bee sting-Horses are flight animals – they run away frm any perceived danger – on the subject of weather this person was an experienced rider, well….I have been in the horse business for over 30 years and I STILL take an occasional lesson, watch a video from a new trainer etc – its like insurance, you NEVER know anything – if I was renting a horse I would probably sign the waiver and put beginner or intermediate – heck – I want one of their GOOD horses – not the one that takes off every time the wind blows – Waiver, Schmaiver-the person should have been honest about their experience. When a horse takes off like that there\’s not much the instructor could have done – I tell my students hold on and try and keep the horses head up – that\’s all you can do-
I agree, I was actually bucked off the same horse that killed Christopher Reeve. Im sure I could have had a law suit based on the fact that they knew the horses history. Instead, I got back up, smacked the horse in the mouth as hard as I could and jumped back on.
You must have gone to the same school on disciplining horses that I did. That method works quite well! People tend to forget that horses are constantly testing the rider and trying to assert dominance. An experienced rider accepts this fact and has to expect trouble. When trouble doesn\’t happen, you got lucky.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Good thing CT is not a ski destination. This precedent would kill whatever ski resort business might be. I sure hope UT, CO and the other ski states don\’t get any ideas.
Even in 1st year law school, the \”assumption of risk\” doctrine is taught to govern all activities with these inherent risks. Under the logic of this decision, any skier would have the \”right\” to negotiate away the assumption of risk statement that is usually printed right on the lift ticket. Count on fewer ski resorts in the future if such is the case.
Furthermore, I own horses and know that every time I walk into a stall with them, I have to be on my guard, no matter how experienced I am, or how well trained the horse is. Given that the horse isn\’t a piece of equipment that can be controlled under all circumstances, it is ludicrous for a judge to think that the defendants had a duty or even the ability to protect the plaintiff any further than they did. Horseback riding is inherently dangerous. I have watched helplessly as my own daughter (who is a very experienced rider) was dragged around the pasture by a \”good horse\”. Fortunately, she escaped major injury. What was the lesson? Who knows? We never figured out why the horse bolted. The only real lesson is the hard lesson of life – that stuff happens. It happens more often when you are involved in an activity that involves risk. My sympathies for the plaintiff, by she shouldn\’t expect anything from the defendant, unless the defendant actually caused the accident. I didn\’t see that. Judges need to pull their heads out and stop pandering for the sake of sympathy or political expediency (not wanting to make an unpopular decision, despite the law). Attorneys bent on unjust self-enrichment are working their way to a miserable destiny.
Well said Ski Dude. I am a very experienced rider, and know that you should always expect the unexpected, especially if your are on an unfamiliar horse. I feel for these businessowners on this matter. This decision could put a business such as this under the ground. This decision is for the birds!
Wait a minute – have any of you sent your kids off for activities? Without a waiver, no participation – and you think your ten year old should \”assume the risk\”?
These types of pre-loss waivers or attempted immunity from consequences of negligence are in many cases nothing but an excuse for poor management practices. They also frequent overreach and seek to exclude even the operator\’s own negligence.
The old saying is \”pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered\”. I never have liked these waivers, especially when dealing with minors, and frankly, I don\’t have a problem with this decision.
LJK & Sam are actually correct in their comments: \”societal expectation\” is what is controlling here. Who signed the waiver? The parent or the minor? What about assumption of risk? I guess they could have \”trained\” her on the plastic horse with the wheels over in the corner, but she probably would have been insulted & sued them for that!
Ski Dude is absolutely right. This decision will kill several segments of the recreational industry. Horses are unpredictable, even for experienced people. Not to mention the message that SOMEONE ELSE is responsible for whatever bad happened.
I have been on the other side of exactly this type of suit – I had a horse kick another rider after telling the rider to leave one horse length between each. To no avail – Horses are live animals-they are unpredictable-I\’ve seen the gentlest old broodmare go running and bucking off because of a bee sting-Horses are flight animals – they run away frm any perceived danger – on the subject of weather this person was an experienced rider, well….I have been in the horse business for over 30 years and I STILL take an occasional lesson, watch a video from a new trainer etc – its like insurance, you NEVER know anything – if I was renting a horse I would probably sign the waiver and put beginner or intermediate – heck – I want one of their GOOD horses – not the one that takes off every time the wind blows – Waiver, Schmaiver-the person should have been honest about their experience. When a horse takes off like that there\’s not much the instructor could have done – I tell my students hold on and try and keep the horses head up – that\’s all you can do-
I agree, I was actually bucked off the same horse that killed Christopher Reeve. Im sure I could have had a law suit based on the fact that they knew the horses history. Instead, I got back up, smacked the horse in the mouth as hard as I could and jumped back on.
You must have gone to the same school on disciplining horses that I did. That method works quite well! People tend to forget that horses are constantly testing the rider and trying to assert dominance. An experienced rider accepts this fact and has to expect trouble. When trouble doesn\’t happen, you got lucky.
Maybe Bradley\’s tactic would work on people; politicians, attorneys & the like.